From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-07 10:04:17
Joaquín Mª López Muñoz wrote:
> AlisdairM ha escrito:
>> One of the problems I perceived with Boost SoC involvement last year is
>> that very few of the projects have come up for review, with the notable
>> exception of Bimap.
>> Would it be possible to bump SoC projects up the review queue to get
>> feedback while the student is still participating, towards the end of
>> the SoC period?
>> Perhaps have a special SoC review queue for 'mini-reviews' where the
>> students can present to the wider Boost audience and hopefully be
>> encouraged to continue the work for a more complete review.
> In a paper I wrote about the experience with GSoC 06:
> I propose something similar, informal reviews to be held by the end
> of the official GSoC period. As you, I think most projects will need to
> extend well past GSoC deadlines, which is not a bad thing if people
> know in advance. As I see it, there is no need to bump projects in
> the review queue, since informal reviews need not interfere with
> the formal procedure.
I believe we could get the review wizard to rearrange for SoC projects if we
really thought that students could get the project done in the SoC time
period. Most can't be though, so that's why we didn't really require it last
year. Frankly though, I'm much more inclined to go for Boost extension
projects where students can work on existing libraries instead of new totally
libraries because of these results. I think Boost will get more out of it
although it's less desireable for students because they don't get to invent a
whole new library.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk